2016 elections - because it's never too early

[Razgovory]

To be fair, I wasn't eliciting a response from you, just stating a fact.  In any case, given that you start off with foaming, and then may or may not proceed with reasoned out arguments, detracts from the credibility of such arguments.

Too Razzy.  I'm done.

Man, I'm good.  I winning arguments without even being part of them.

[Caliga]

To be honest, she strikes me as mostly fluff with no real substance.

Which makes her different from pretty much everyone else in Congress how....? 

[merithyn]

To be honest, she strikes me as mostly fluff with no real substance.

Which makes her different from pretty much everyone else in Congress how....? 

No voting record to compare slogans to.

[Maximus]

Stating that the optimal solution is necessarily a compromise is the fallacy of middle ground.  Sometimes the optimal solution is all of Column A, and none of Column B.  The truth is not always somewhere in the middle. 

How fortunate I never claimed it was, then.

[DGuller]

Stating that the optimal solution is necessarily a compromise is the fallacy of middle ground.  Sometimes the optimal solution is all of Column A, and none of Column B.  The truth is not always somewhere in the middle. 

How fortunate I never claimed it was, then.

You chimed in on Meri's chain of reasoning and her use/interpretation of "balanced", so that's what I had to go with.

[Maximus]

You chimed in on Meri's chain of reasoning and her use/interpretation of "balanced", so that's what I had to go with.

I regret to inform you that I am not Meri, nor is she me, nor have I referenced her posts, her positions, or her chain of reasoning directly or indirectly in this thread.

[Eddie Teach]

I winning

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pipTwjwrQYQ

[DGuller]

You chimed in on Meri's chain of reasoning and her use/interpretation of "balanced", so that's what I had to go with.

I regret to inform you that I am not Meri, nor is she me, nor have I referenced her posts, her positions, or her chain of reasoning directly or indirectly in this thread.

You replied to Sheilbh's reply to Meri. 

[Sheilbh]

Anyone who ignores demographic effects on public finances that occur in the future is being stupid.

I explicitly mentioned pension reform - as I say every country in the developed world has gone through significant pension reform over the last couple of decades. I'd also add building enough houses for growing populations (as we've failed to do in the UK) and making sure there's enough school spaces etc (as we've failed to do in the UK). In the US that means fixing healthcare above all else.

[Admiral Yi]

I explicitly mentioned pension reform - as I say every country in the developed world has gone through significant pension reform over the last couple of decades. I'd also add building enough houses for growing populations (as we've failed to do in the UK) and making sure there's enough school spaces etc (as we've failed to do in the UK). In the US that means fixing healthcare above all else.

Then you render your previous statement about long term thinking meaningless.  The only long term thinking we're engaged in right now concerns Social Security/Medicare's effect on the budget.

Disagree about housing.  You can throw up a house in a couple weeks.

[Sheilbh]

Then you render your previous statement about long term thinking meaningless.  The only long term thinking we're engaged in right now concerns Social Security/Medicare's effect on the budget.

As I say I think the limit's about 10-15 years. I think almost no policy will linger unchanged for the long-term. They always need to be reformed based on current information. Basing it on what you imagine the world will look like in 25-50 years is about as useful as basing policy on astrology in terms of accuracy.

Also Social Security's fine unless you get obsessed with the conceit that it's a real 'trust fund' () and Medicare's problems are a function of the terrifying healthcare inflation in the US.

Disagree about housing.  You can throw up a house in a couple weeks.

Maybe in America

[Grey Fox]

It's true tho. Takes 3 weeks to build a weatherproof house. Might even get the paiting done in that time. Things go faster when you use lumber & sheetrock instead of bricks & mortar.

[Admiral Yi]

As I say I think the limit's about 10-15 years. I think almost no policy will linger unchanged for the long-term. They always need to be reformed based on current information. Basing it on what you imagine the world will look like in 25-50 years is about as useful as basing policy on astrology in terms of accuracy.

The fact that no policy is guaranteed to live forever is not an argument for ignoring future problems now.  Rather it is an argument for being even more conservative and pessimistic in our assumptions, since our good fixes could be overturned by short sighted populist knuckleheads at any point.

Also Social Security's fine unless you get obsessed with the conceit that it's a real 'trust fund' () and Medicare's problems are a function of the terrifying healthcare inflation in the US.

Social Security is fine and the debt is fucked if the trust fund is real.  If it's fake the debt is fine and Social Security is fucked.

[Sheilbh]

The fact that no policy is guaranteed to live forever is not an argument for ignoring future problems now.  Rather it is an argument for being even more conservative and pessimistic in our assumptions, since our good fixes could be overturned by short sighted populist knuckleheads at any point.

I've said you address problems that you can see based on current information - not a projection of eternal policies lasting in an eternally average period of growth - and that no policy lasts forever. They should always be being reformed to improve public services. We're better making policies based on what we know, not what can be guessed of unknown unknowns in the future.

Social Security is fine and the debt is fucked if the trust fund is real.  If it's fake the debt is fine and Social Security is fucked.

Social Security spending in the future should be relatively stable - not least because of previous rounds of reform.

[Admiral Yi]

 

The Boomer bulge is not an unknown unknown. 

Social Security spending will not be stable in the future--it will skyrocket.